1. 2015 Leadership Conference “All In: Achieving Results Together”
Implementing and Scaling up the DEC Recommended Practices for Improving Child Engagement and Outcomes: RP²: Reaching Potentials through Recommended Practices
Barbara J. Smith, Lise Fox, Carol Trivette
Early Childhood Technical Assistance Center (ECTA)
Betsy Sutherland, Utah State Office of Education
Jennifer Moses, Minnesota Department of Education

2. ECTA Intensive TA
Build capacity of programs and practitioners to use DEC Recommended Practices (RPs) to promote child engagement in learning opportunities
Build capacity of the professional development system to provide ongoing training and support to programs to implement DEC RPs with fidelity

3. The “What”: the DEC Recommended Practices
Which ones?
Those that have evidence that they produce engagement of children with adults, peers, activities and materials
Why engagement?
Research indicates that higher levels of child engagement with adults, peers, and materials are related to the learning of children both with and without disabilities. Research also demonstrates that among children at-risk for poor outcomes there is a link between engagement and children’s learning.

4. Recommended Practice Topic Areas
Leadership
Assessment
Environment
Family
Instruction
Interaction
Teaming and Collaboration
Transition
ECTA/PW Leadership Team

5. The “How”: Systems Model for Early Childhood Professional Development
Incorporates best practice from:
Systems Thinking
Cross-Agency Collaborative Planning
Implementation Science
System: Too often PD is considered simplistically, e.g. one-shot training
If the goal of PD is the high fidelity use of EBPs, then it is multifaceted with many interdependent elements:
Requires state, local and program infrastructure and systems using effective implementation components and strategies
Data/evaluation systems to ensure fidelity and data-driven decision making
Monitoring and feedback loops
Implementation supports (drivers) such as coaching and decision-making teams
Cross Agency Collaborative Planning:
Cross-agency State Leadership Team
Cross-agency PD effort
Collaborative Planning: shared decision-making; intensive planning (monthly meetings, shared vision, shared resources, etc)
Implementation Science:
Stages (2-4 years)
Implementation Teams
Buy-in/Readiness
Drivers (e.g. leadership & competence)
Data decision-making
Goal is High Fidelity use of EBPs (DEC RPs)

6. Implementation Process Interactive Guide

7. Key Elements of the RP² Intensive TA Model
State Leadership Team to plan and implement a sustainable, cross-agency, state infrastructure; develops sustainability and scale-up plans
A Master Cadre of External Coaches that support high fidelity use of Recommended Practices in programs
Implementation and Demonstration Sites with Leadership Teams and internal coaches; demo sites to demonstrate effectiveness and to model for others
Data/Evaluation and data feed-back systems for: data-based decision making at all levels for PD, ensuring fidelity, demonstrating effectiveness, planning, implementing and tracking systems change and making system recommendations

8. external coach to sites; state T/TA
RP2 System Components
State Leadership Team
State Coordinators
Demo Sites
Program Leadership Team: administrator, internal coach, data coordinator, others
Implementation Sites
Master Cadre
external coach to sites; state T/TA

9. State Planning Guide

10. 1. State Leadership Team Is a committed, cross-agency group about 15
Makes multi-year commitment
Meets monthly; uses effective meeting strategies
Establishes Demo sites, Master Cadre, data systems
Secures resources
Provides infrastructure
Builds political investment
Ensures systems integration
Works to sustain initial effort and to scale up statewide

11. 2. Master Cadre: Professional Development and Technical Assistance
Master T/TA Cadre
Carefully selected initial team of T/TA providers
Application process
Regionally located
Expertise in 0-5, center services and family coaching
Mentored by ECTA faculty partners in training, external coaching, and data systems

12. Master Cadre Will act as an External Coach-
Meet with local Leadership team
Support the local internal coach
Provide additional training and content support to local professionals (using implementation science)
Help Local leadership team collect, disaggregate and act up data for quality program implementation
Help scale up statewide

13. 3. Program-Wide Demonstrations of High Fidelity Implementation
1. High fidelity demonstrations that exemplify the value of the implementation of the Recommended Practices (RPs)
2. Demonstration programs help build the political will needed to scale-up and sustain the RPs
3. Demonstration programs provide a model for other programs and professionals, “seeing is believing”
4. Demonstration programs “ground” the work of the State Team in the realities and experiences of programs and professionals

14. Program Leadership Team
Family Engagement
Program-Wide Implementation
Supports for Practice Implementation
Systems to Identify and Respond to Individual Child Needs
Continuous Professional Development
Data Decision-Making: Examining Implementation and Outcomes
Child Engagement in Learning

15. What Programs Need External coaching
Confident and knowledgeable facilitator to build leadership team capacity to guide implementation and fidelity
Professional development
Training
Practice-based coaching
Ongoing support

16. What Programs Need (2) Implementation plan Internal coaching capacity
Resources to address full range of individual child needs
Data tools and evaluation systems
Fidelity
Decisions
Outcomes

17. 4. A Data Decision-Making Approach
State and Program
Outcomes are identified
Fidelity and outcomes are measured
Data are summarized and used to:
Identify training needs
Deliver professional development
Make programmatic changes
Problem solve around specific children or issues
Ensure child learning and success
Data collection AND ANALYSIS is an ongoing process

18. Using Data for Decisions
Look
View your data using meaningful visual displays that can guide decision making
Think
Analyze your data using key questions that leads to decision-making
Act
Create and implement action plan based on data analysis

19. Classroom Programs: Building Capacity
Familiarity with Recommended Practices and understanding of their use
Commitment to program-wide implementation versus training the practitioner
Program-wide implementation supports in addition to teacher/child supports
Data decision-making tools, processes, training
These are the major shifts for the classroom programs – the things they are not used to doing that I can use as illustrations of what is different about this approach

20. Classroom Programs: Implementation Challenges
Leadership teaming and data decision-making
Resources to provide coaching support to teachers
Use of data to monitor intervention outcomes
Engaging families
Efficient access to supports to address individual child needs
Integration with other initiatives
These are some of the challenges we had to address in supporting programs

21. Home Visiting Programs: Building Capacity
Recommended Practices are building on previous initiatives
Commitment to supporting home visitors through coaching
Flexible in how the implementation will occur - making it work in each program

22. Home Visiting Programs: Implementation Challenges
Identification of families to start with in coaching process
Coordinating visits with families
Resources to provide coaching support to home visitors
Commitment to program-wide training and coaching
Limited data for data decision making
Engaging families on the Program Leadership Team

23. Issues for Scale-Up
External coaching – experienced, trained facilitators to support the leadership team
Data decision-making – data tools, ways to organize data for decision-making, training in use of data
Internal coaching – training and support of coaches (who will coach, funding for coaches, supervision of coaches, who receives coaching, duration and dosage of coaching)
Training and ongoing professional development
ECTA/PW Leadership Team

24. RP² Project: Reaching Potential through Recommended Practices
Utah State Office of Education
Salt Lake City, Utah
Technical Assistance provided by the Early Childhood Technical Assistance Center

25. Why did we participate? Request from LEA
Need for further implementation of inclusive practices
State priority on improving outcomes for preschool students
Because I saw the “ad” and thought it would be a good idea….. :/

26. Choosing the State Leadership Team
Collaborating with departments within USOE relevant to Early Childhood
Title I
Teaching and Learning
Jordan School District (the one that asked…)
Community partner (YMCA preschool program)
Higher Ed - Early Childhood Special Education Program
Office of Child Care – Professional Development Provider
Professional Development Network (Special Education)
USOE Special Education Coordinator (my boss)

27. Choosing Implementation Sites
Which districts have inclusive preschools, or are making progress toward inclusive practices?
Which districts are partnering with community preschools?
Which private preschools are currently serving students with disabilities?
Which district asked? (repeatedly)
State-wide representation

28. Choosing Implementation Sites (2)
Ogden School District
Partnership with YMCA program
Y teachers need training on differentiating instruction and student engagement for SWD
Five year plan to become fully inclusive; currently 100% self-contained
Urban district, second highest poverty level in state
Sevier School District
Plans to open three Title I preschools, Fall 2015, now Fall 2016
Preschool Coordinator
Rural district

29. Choosing Implementation Sites (3)
Washington School District
- Fully inclusive program, Special Ed and Title I
- Need for representation in southern part of state
Jordan School District
- Request for training on student engagement
- Third largest district in the state with over 1000 preschool students
- Want to improve inclusive environments

30. Choosing Implementation Sites (4)
Private Providers
The Learning Tree
A provider within Jordan School District enrolling SWD
Requested more information on working with SWD
Jordan District will work with this provider next year
Jewish Community Center preschool
10% of their preschool students have identified disabilities
Requested more information on differentiating instruction and student engagement

31. Internal Coaches
Jordan hired a full time coach as a result of entering this project
Washington already had three part time coaches
Sevier’s preschool coordinator will act as coach
Ogden’s Y program already had a full time coach
JCC already has a coach who is SpEd licensed

32. External Coaches – The TAP Team (Technical Assistance Providers)
Autism Specialist from USOE
Recommendation from the State Leadership Team
University of Utah faculty member, recruited by Jordan School District
UPDN (Utah Professional Development Network) Provider with early childhood background
Myself

33. Why are we doing this??
Increase inclusive environments: students with disabilities need access to typical peers
Increase access to early childhood education for all children, especially those at-risk
To improve outcomes

34. Reaching Potential through Recommended Practices: Minnesota
Professional Development Specialist (lead for RP²):
Michelle Dockter
Part C Coordinator:
Kara Tempel
619 Coordinator:
Jennifer Moses
Early Childhood Special Education Supervisor:
Lisa Backer

35. Simon Sinek’s “Start with Why”
Always Start with Why
Why
How
What
Simon Sinek’s “Start with Why”

36. Why in Minnesota?
WHY: Increase the slope of the developmental trajectory of every child receiving ECSE services in MN.
HOW: Doing it right! Doing it well!
WHAT: Compliance (IEPs), Evidence-Based or Evidence-Informed Practices, Foundational Skills, etc.

37. Minnesota’s Approach
Minnesota’s Centers of Excellence for Young Children with Disabilities:
Regionalized
Professional Development Facilitators
Focus on Active Implementation

38. RP² in Minnesota 4 Classroom-based programs
5 Home-visiting programs (including 1 Head Start program)
Professional Development Facilitators serve as the master cadre (external coaches)
Local programs develop the leadership team and capacity for internal coaching

39. Progress and Data in Minnesota: Classroom-Based Programs
Benchmarks of Quality: All programs have made improvement.
Observation Scale: All programs have made improvement.
STARE: Most targeted children have been rated to be engaged all of the time.

40. Progress and Data in Minnesota: Home-Based Programs
Benchmarks of Quality: All programs have made improvement.
Observation Scale: Most programs have made improvement.
Child Engagement Scale: Data for children across all programs has been quite variable.

41. Leadership Team Year-End Evaluation (Classroom)
All programs agree that they have the skills to support program-wide implementation.
All programs agree that they are in a better position to continue the implementation of Recommended Practices.
All programs identified action plan goals that will move their programs forward with implementation.
Participant quote: “We have a clearer goal of next steps moving forward as we roll this out in our district”.

42. Leadership Team Year-End Evaluation (Home-Visiting)
All programs agree that they have the skills to support program-wide implementation.
All programs agree that they are in a better position to continue the implementation of Recommended Practices.
All programs identified action plan goals that will move their programs forward with implementation.
Participant quote: “Thank you so much for this opportunity. We are becoming a better program and better early interventionists because of RP² and coaching.”

43. What Now? Continued support of Year 2 programs
Recruitment and training of additional classroom and home-visiting programs
Infusion of Recommended Practices across innovations offered through Minnesota’s Centers of Excellence for Young Children with Disabilities